Menlo Park City Council warm to housing, medical offices Menlo Park City Council warm to housing, medical offices (June 22, 2005)

** But residents worry about traffic, effects on schools from Linfield Oaks projects.

By Rebecca Wallace

Almanac Staff Writer

Glossy ideas packed a Menlo Park City Council session last week on proposed housing and medical projects: bright homes with neighborhood parks in between, and spruced-up office buildings giving residents an easy drive to the doctor.

Speaking on one of the five projects planned for the Linfield Oaks neighborhood, architect Susan Eschweiler pointed at an image of an aging building at 321 Middlefield Road and dubbed it "brutal concrete." After its facelift, though, there would be larger windows, a sloped roof, limestone facing and attractive landscaping, she said.

"If we don't fix up this old building, the area's land values will go down," she told the council.

The largely vacant office building would be converted to medical offices, perhaps accompanied by pharmacies and medical supply stores that could yield sales-tax revenue for the city, developer Jim Pollock added.

The other project teams were also optimistic. They included a representative of Olive Hill Development, which is seeking to build 36 single-family homes at 175 Linfield Drive and 22 homes at 110 Linfield; and one from SummerHill Homes, which is planning 34 homes at 75 Willow Road.

The pictures painted may have been pretty, but the critics weren't all raving.

All 11 residents who spoke at the meeting were critical of the projects. Most opposed them outright due to concerns that the new homes and medical offices would flood the area with new traffic. Many worried about the impacts new families with children would have on growing local schools.

Most of the council members, though, seemed very receptive to the projects.

Lee Duboc said she liked the idea of Menlo Park residents having their doctors close by. And both Nicholas Jellins and Mickie Winkler spoke about the housing-jobs "imbalance" and the need to build more homes.

Some of the residents had said many of the housing lots proposed are too small; the most diminutive are in the 2,300-square-foot range. Ms. Winkler, though, remarked: "There are many single and older people who want smaller lots. They don't want that much lawn."

Council members Andy Cohen and Kelly Fergusson were less enthusiastic. Ms. Fergusson also wondered about the effects on schools, and Mr. Cohen said the projects, which are at varying stages in the approval process, should have been handled together and less in a piecemeal way.

The Olive Hill projects are the farthest along, with a draft environmental impact report set to be completed this month. The others are poised to undergo traffic studies.

One of the five projects got a less positive reception from the council: a plan to convert an office building at 8 Homewood Place to medical use. As they had said before, members of the council said that site is better suited to residences.
'Intense traffic'

As with many issues in Menlo Park, residents' concerns about traffic dominated the meeting.

Nancy Hosay said she feared "intense traffic" would come from the medical offices, because Stanford University physicians could have a regional draw. Frank Carney said the medical traffic was better off on El Camino Real and that the offices should take the place of vacant car dealerships there.

The council expressed preliminary support for several traffic-mitigation plans proposed by city staff. These include building a roundabout to slow traffic at Linfield Drive and Homewood Place, and building a median at the perennially troubled crossroads of Ravenswood Avenue and Alma Street. This would block left turns and through traffic on Alma.
'Not ready to cry wolf'

While many residents voiced concerns about overcrowding in Encinal and Laurel schools, Menlo Park City School District superintendent Ken Ranella said later that his district is not taking a position on the Linfield Oaks projects.

Mr. Ranella said his district is growing and will add seven new classrooms next year: three due to state class-size requirements and four because of the growth of the student body. So the district is undertaking a demographic study to find out where the growth is coming from.

"We're just not ready to cry wolf or to be overly alarmed," he said about the potential impact of the planned homes. "We just need adequate time and preparation for increased enrollment."

The district would also need funding to take on new students, Mr. Ranella added. Developers of residential projects do pay some fees to ease impacts on schools, he said.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.